News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by growlist on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @08:32AM (#21322846)
Wondering if those active filters I've seen in the past might be an idea - isn't it the case that exhaust pollution is only half of emissions, with the rest coming from brakes and tyres?

The US was right to be suspicious of diesel.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by jlnthws on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @09:18AM (#21323268)
I had in mind that at most 60% of particles emitted by non-electric car are due to the exhaust. It's actually a bit more complex as there are different types of particles with different distributions depending on many factors. In [1], they seem to conclude that it is indeed 50%-50% for most particles, so it would mean that switching to an electric car only halves the emitted particles on the location the car is used (nothing is said about the overall assessment of its lifespan, maintenance, battery recycling, fuel production and transport).

Regarding diesel, it's important to remember that it was a byproduct of oil refinery that had to be used somehow (instead of being discarded and trashed in the nearby river). Some industrial engines and boats have been designed to use it (and are actually better run on diesel engines). Diesel car engine also became a thing, but was originally emitting more small particles. Specific catalytic converters have been introduced to remove those particles decades ago, with very high efficiency (95+%). Those converters are alas not so efficient at lower speed. That's why we don't want too many diesel cars in our cities.

[1] https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/J...

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by Brakenshire on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @09:54AM (#21323590)
> In [1], they seem to conclude that it is indeed 50%-50% for most particles, so it would mean that switching to an electric car only halves the emitted particles

That isn’t correct, because electric cars mostly use regenerative braking which eliminates brake emissions. Also, this is only for particulates, NOx also emissions are totally eliminated by the switch.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by jlnthws on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @10:53AM (#21324265)
Indeed, I was not aware of it and it makes a huge difference. So local emissions reduction is probably in the 70+% per vehicle. Tyres and roads are the last big chunk of emissions then. Where is my flying Tesla?

[2] https://electricautonomy.ca/2019/09/11/better-braking-anothe...

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by eyegor on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @12:33PM (#21325623)
Note that this publication only seems to be analyzing the costs post-production. It's important to consider how damaging the cobalt and other rare mineral mining is for the sake of batteries, which are essentially scrap after 10 years or so by current standards. Older ice engines can basically be rebuilt forever as long as they're maintained. Certainly alternative battery technologies will emerge in the future but the current ones seem problematic.

Back in college a few years ago I wrote a paper trying to compare the environmental cost of maintaining and operating 90s cars vs buying and replacing electric car batteries measured by co2 emitted (typically written co2e). This was written around 2012 but I found the break even around 10 years. That is, electric cars were measured as a fairly flat line (not fully flat, assuming some non zero co2e for electricity generation). There was of course a ton of hand waiving but the gas car was assumed to have a y intercept near zero and to be operated for 10 or 15k miles/year (can't remember exactly but I know it was in that range). I would link it but I'm currently not in the same country as the hard drive that might still have a copy of it. Of course I would prefer to have a peer reviewed publication on this, but I had a lot of trouble researching the manufacturing/mining estimates back when I wrote it.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by growlist on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @06:03PM (#21328912)
Jeremy Clarkson mentioned a study on Top Gear years ago that showed (as I recall it) that a new Jeep Wrangler would, all things considered, have lower lifetime environmental cost than a new Toyota Prius, the gist of it being that all the high-tech and advanced materials in the Prius had a massive environmental cost that far outweighed its lifetime hydrocarbon frugality when compared to a car as simple to manufacture and being made of basic materials like the Wrangler.

For some reason, people are particularly hostile to countervailing evidence when it contradicts previously swallowed feelgood propaganda.

Edit: 'Using the average CO2 output of the European electricity network, Ernst concluded that an electric car using a 60kWh battery made in Europe would have to travel some 700,000 kilometres (435,000 miles) before it is “greener than an average petrol car”. However, Ernst also says that a fully renewable European grid would reduce the EV’s CO2 lag to just 30,000km (18,640 miles). '

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/analysis-just-ho...

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by Gibbon1 on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @07:45PM (#21329657)
Trouble with a Jeep Wrangler is it's a utterly shitty unreliable vehicle.

Also if you want to trust basic balance sheet economics, a Prius is cheaper than than Jeep Wrangler. 'splain that.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by MisterTea on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @08:39AM (#21322897)
The US wasn't suspicious of Diesel. People here associated them with being too dirty, noisey and high vibration. They didn't want to drive something that ran like a truck or bus. Of course this was in the 70's/80's when there were barely any emission controls and engines were all mechanically controlled. Unfortunately that image stuck with them well into the "clean" diesel era. Shame as my friend had a diesel Passat with manual transmission and it was amazing on fuel and fun to drive.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by telchar on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @01:19PM (#21326205)
We learned when VW's diesel cheating scandal came to light that your friend's Passat probably wasn't as clean as the company claimed. It was fun to drive because VW made it run dirty when not on the test stand. This doesn't seem like a good argument for diesel vehicles.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by growlist on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @09:25AM (#21323321)
Try following a diesel versus a petrol as a cyclist. There are estimates that the push for diesel is directly responsible for tens of thousands of excess deaths in the UK, for example.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by MisterTea on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @09:40AM (#21323465)
Are you referring to a modern clean diesel with DPF/SCR or the old mechanical smoke belching rattlers? My friends Passat was a 2009 model I believe.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by Brakenshire on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @09:57AM (#21323615)
Diesels from 2009 produce 5-10x higher emissions than the regulatory limits when used in real world conditions. Even diesels built this year vastly exceed the required emissions. They actually had to include a fudge factor which they’re slowly decreasing because diesels were so much worse than they were supposed to be.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by mprovost on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @09:49AM (#21323552)
The 2009 model year is when VW started to program their diesels to cheat on emissions tests.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by mikestew on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @11:40AM (#21324913)
Are you referring to a modern clean diesel...

"...or my friend's 2009 VW?" When speaking of emissions output, I find it amusing that your anecdata involves a Volkswagen diesel.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by onlingyding on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @12:19PM (#21325455)
I don't know how true this is but I've heard the older diesels (2000 era) actually had lower NOx emissions than the newer models due to them running at lower temperatures as they weren't trying to hit newer regulations on particulate emissions.

This also then led to newer models emitting finer particulate which was more easily picked up by the wind and could travel into the lungs more easily instead of denser particulate which fell to the roadside.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by growlist on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @01:09PM (#21326086)
This is definitely my experience - breathing diesel exhaust now makes my lungs immediately tighten up in a way that didn't used to happen. Perhaps I'm just getting old though.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by Reason077 on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @12:49PM (#21325835)
> "Unfortunately that image stuck with them well into the "clean" diesel era."

Or, fortunately as it turned out. "Clean" diesel is a public health disaster in Europe. The US dodged a bullet by not jumping on that bandwagon.

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by rconti on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @11:41AM (#21324926)
People everywhere associated them with being too dirty, noisy, and high vibration.

The US just didn't provide the incentives to push people to buy them due to their efficiency. We pretty much said "yeah, keep driving that F-150".

It turned out that fuel economy was not the only important thing to consider. You could say we lucked into not increasing diesel adoption.

(I own a diesel vehicle with SCR, and an petrol engined vehicle, and an EV)

Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by skocznymroczny on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @08:34AM (#21322859)
Well, at least they have those filters. In Poland, it's common to cut off these filters because most people don't want to spend money to replace them and supposedly the fuel efficiency is better without those.
Re:London Ultra Low Emission Zone cuts toxic air pollution b... by gambiting on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @08:40AM (#21322899)
In the UK there is a £5000 fine for any garage which cuts them out - I wish the same fine was applied in Poland, at the moment it's not legal to do but 1) the penalty for doing so is marginal 2) there is no enforcement at all.